We are considering getting rid of advertising, much to the fanfare of many readers. Unlike the favorite meme of the left that we are in the employ of “big oil” the reality is that we aren’t, never have been, and never will be. WUWT’s “big oil” donations are about as real and valuable as these carbon credit certificates.
We don’t get that much from advertising, and lately it seems like it has become too intrusive, and slows down the site. In actuality, our ad partner is serving more ads than ever before for even less returns. It’s seemingly the law of diminishing returns in action.
If we do eliminate the advertising, we would be moving to a donation support model and will be encouraging donations more regularly. Some of you have already setup monthly donations, and for that we are very grateful.
Of course both Charles and I are curious how our audience will respond so we set up these two polls to help in our strategic planning.
Thanks again for all the great support we receive, both in emails and comments, and of course for your generous financial contributions as well.
Anthony Watts, Charles Rotter
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I would chip in $5 a month. I suggest you use a service like SubscribeStar that doesn’t cancel people for politics (vs Patreon which does).
In the end, I see no good reason to either have intrusive ads or ask for donations. The makers of this site are the ones who want to tell the world something. THEY have to finance it, and put their money where their mouth is. Not third parties advertising unrelated products. And certainly not those who they want to educate, which would mean an echo-chamber and endless preaching to the converted (already a problem here…). The message must get out to those who currently wouldn’t dream of paying for it, those who disdain, mock, and hate what is published here on this site. It must be pressed on the population by brute force. A site like this must not generate revenue but invest money. If anything, WUWT must PLACE advertisements everywhere on the Net, not carry others’ ads. AFAIK the makers of the site do have real jobs where they do productive work. Writing a blog, even a highly informational and educational one like WUWT, is NOT a honest source of income but something one spends money on. Artists and musicians being paid for making records and appearing in the media instead of having to pay for the privilege has caused the total decadence and ruin of the arts within less than a century already. Scientists asking for donations and grants rather than spending their personal income and wealth on their research has corrupted science no less. I fear that WUWT might be already further down on this slippery slope than it can afford.
must be nice to be independently wealthy Alex. Unfortunately most people who have “real jobs where they do productive work” aren’t so blessed. They have bills to pay.
Only rich people and big corporations get to have a say, I guess.
I discovered WUWT when this site was mediating the funding of Climate Audit.
Since then, I have gotten far more from WUWT than I have given ( maybe $400 over all those years). I guess I’d feel pretty foolish if it were the other way around!
I’m not sure of the years, but if n=15, at $100 a year, I should cough up that dough; it was worth it. Good luck trying to get that out of me.
So now, every time I click a link, the WaPo or NYT or the Grauniad (okay, not them) or Forbes etc. wants me to give them a yearly stipend so that I can see what the other side is thinking. I have tried that in the past and stopped because it wasn’t worth it.
If WUWT required $300 a year, I would probably balk, but if you had a way for me to click you a Loonie (yes, Canadian Tire money) each day that I visited, you would probably get $350 out of me without any trouble.
As for the other approaches, my frugality would vary inversely to my sense that my contribution was significant; I actually have no idea what it takes to make this all happen.
Happy to pay US$100 a year. Newbies have to be free, somehow.
Anthony,
My reommendation is you should consider setting up a Patreon account and ask for $5/month for those who frequent WUWT. On Patreon you can be more responsive to your Patreon subscribers requests/comments/questions there too.
I suggest avoiding Patreon like the plague It has a reputation for cancelling people with political views they disagree with. Subscribe star has a better reputation in that regard.
I must have donated $ 500 to WUWT over the last 10 years, and don’t regret a penny of it.
Keep up the good work.
I read regularly on about 6 sites. I often give $25 per year to 3 or 4 of them.
With all the other needs I contribute to, that is all I can do now.
I do agree that ads have gotten intrusive compared to the beginning of such on WUWT.
I began at WUWT in 2008.
Best to all, and thanks.
John
I use Opera browser and Adblock+ and there are no ads. Adblock is free.
A few years ago I made a payment to Paypal using an AMEX card. I later discovered that Paypal had debited the card 4 X £99 for no reason [presumably £100 would have triggered some security breach]. It took me several months to get a refund after a lot of correspondence. I do not do Paypal.
I heart WUWT. I have a fixed low income and can’t afford much, but I make regular donations. I prefer mailing a check, and I know where to send it — I won’t give the address out because I respect the privacy.
However, in thinking about this, it might be worthwhile for WUWT to get a PO Box just for mail-in donations — with an address you could post online safely — for those of us who don’t do Paypal but still wish to contribute.
I’m ambivalent about yearly or monthly. I’m happy to contribute to a blog that you have been running for such a long time that has been valuable world wide. I think something in the order of a magazine subscription cost but somewhat less because there is no paper magazine to publish/post out. Don’t know if that would generate sufficient cash flow.
All the best for the future.
Anthony:
You did make me realize that I have read and enjoyed your site for several years and have not contributed to continuing your excellent site. I just rectified that to the best of my ability. Hope it helps keep you going.
Keep up the good work.
I love the site. Have no problems with ads. Dont know if its because son added Ad Blocker.
I would find $100 a year rather a lot to find.
That is my thought, paying a regular amount per month would be hard for me to sustain. I actually click on adverts here and other blogs just to create income for the site. I don’t find adverts intrusive as most news sites have them and it’s just part of life on the internet.
I suppose that I shouldn’t expect internet content to be free but I’d actually find more advertising acceptable or free content being available only after a few days delay after subscribers get access.
Anthony and Charles,
Thank you for providing the most interesting and educational site that I know of! I apologize profusely for not biting the bullet sooner, but you now are part my monthly expenses and I will increase the amount when feasible.
The ads are obnoxious, but I don’t really mind them all that much; I tend to scroll right past them even though that redhead does remind me of my first wife!
What would be really great is some merch! There are several charts and graphs, like Hansen’s 2008 GSTA or Nahle’s 570Mya record of CO2 and temps, that would make great educational tools for enlightening those who are still capable of thinking! A full page, laminated chart with some irrefutable facts about geologic history or ocean cycles might really shake the faith of some of the alarmists! Small collections by particular authors or on certain subjects could be another way to attract new people to the site, and T-shirts with the WUWT logo and a catchy slogan would be fun!
I just use AdBlock and don’t see ads here or anywhere else.I would keep the advertising even if the returns are small, it’s so easy to get rid of them.
easier to install adblockers surely
us i mean 😉
if ihad to subscribe to all the sites i visit and thats not many
I simply couldnt go there
CLEAN OUT YOUR COOKIE FILES FREQUENTLY REGULARLY – DAILY.
By way of comparison, the WSJ subscription is $40 per month. I choose not to subscribe but NYT appears to be $14.00 per month, WaPo is $10.00 per month. I pay You tube $15.00 per month to avoid ads.
WUWT has a unique value that is different than most other news sources. I learn a great deal from the news articles, but the scientific expertise of many of the commentators is also very valuable to me.
I can easily justify $20 per month, or $240 per year. Do you have data on income levels of your subscribers? Some may find WUWT valuable information, but have less income to work with, Perhaps a discount for your most qualified commenters would make sense, with an understanding that their contribution to WUWT is the value of their comments.
I would be okay paying more than some, because I can contribute cash more readily than expertise. Perhaps those with expertise get a lower price, to keep them as commentators, and their commentary is an important part of the value of that I willingly pay for.
Just a thought that a one size fits all structure may not be the best approach because WUWT is such a unique resource. Many non profits have a hierarchy of levels, Admiral, vice admiral, captain etc, perhaps with a hat, coffee cup etc at each level. Perhaps some version of that is worth considering.
you’re wasting $15/month. I pay youtube $0 and I don’t see any ads there (effective ad blockers are easy to find and don’t cost anything). Suggest instead of paying youtube for something you can accomplish for free, you take that money and donate to WUWT.
I got it, I got it! Unfortunately I doubt there’s any blog host that supports it.
I’d be happy to pay some two bits ($0.25!) per comment I make. (Perhaps with “scholarships” for useful or broke participants.)
That might make Griff put his money where his mouth is. 🙂 And cut down on the subsequent flame fests that help discourage me from wading through all the crap comments over the last few years.
Only “ad” type stuff I get are those in the “recommended” column on the right
Very easy to ignore.
I don’t necessarily mind advertisements, even when they make scrolling/reading inconvenient sometimes – sadly I’ve become desensitized to it. However, the number of ads featuring scantily clad or near naked women is a problem. I’m no prude but viewing this site at work (many topics relate directly to my work) has become impossible lest someone be ‘offended’ and question what i am viewing. I use the feedback function to report each such ad as inappropriate but they continue to come up week after week.
I feel your pain. The only time I see those ads is on my work PC (where I’m blocked from installing software and add-ons of my choosing, so can’t use any of my usual ad-blockers). One work around is to move your browser window so the parts that are occupied by those ads are off the screen as much as possible.
Iv’e never seen an advert on this site, i use Ad-blocker so that’s probably why, seriously i never knew there were ad’s on this site, this article came as a surprise to me.
I use the Brave browser, which also blocks all advertisements. My worry is that by blocking the ads, WUWT gets no benefit from me frequenting the site.
The ads at the bottom always cover content.
It’s been my experience that you just need to scroll to get to the content being covered. At least on the PC, can’t speak for the experience on a phone.
could leave as is, I run adguard adblocker and u block origin on firefox so ads never bug me. if you leave as is those bothered can just run an ad blocker those ok with it can keep on keeping on.
I do disable them on this site 1 or 2 days a week and click some stuff then re-enable.
I can’t commit to anything, VA disability is my only income, but would try to do some one time things even if its small amount should help.
Clicks on the ads are supposedly covering some of the cost for running the blog, “there ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”.
Just keep the ads. I’d rather sift through a few ads than be hounded for donations. I see and here ads on TV and radio every day, big deal. Try offering an ad free experience for a donation and keep the ads for those who don’t donate.
I am going to break my comments down in two separate posts.
First post: The ads —
I’m not bothered by the existence of ads. At home I don’t usually see them (thanks to various ad blocking tools depending on the browser I’m using at the time). The problem is the content of some of the ads. The “scantily clothed young ladies” ads are problematic for those using their work PCs (where ad blocking tools that they use at home may not be an option). They’re what’s known as NSFW (Not Safe For Work).